`Ali and `Uthman in Nahj al-Balaghah

[Hani]

Salam,

An important article from Nahj-ul-Balaghah proving `Ali went to great length in support of `Uthman, that `Ali viewed `Uthman's killers as unjust, that `Ali is proud of his support but `Uthman requested that he steps down etc...

http://nahjul-balagha.net/ali-protects-uthman/

However, the article was missing the remainder of this Sermon 168:

وقد قال له قوم من الصحابة: لو عاقبت قوماً ممن أجلب على عثمان؟ فقال:

يَا إخْوَتَاهُ! إنِّي لَسْتُ أَجْهَلُ مَا تَعْلَمُونَ، وَلكِنْ كَيْفَ لي بِقُوَّة وَالْقَوْمُ الْـمُجْلبُونَ[1] عَلَى حَدِّ شَوْكَتِهِمْ[2]، يَمْلِكُونَنَا وَلاَ نَمْلِكُهُمْ! وهَاهُمْ هؤُلاَءِ قَدْ ثَارَتْ مَعَهُمْ عِبْدَانِكُمْ، وَالْتَفَّتْ إلَيْهِمْ أَعْرَابُكُمْ، وَهُمْ خِلاَلَكُمْ[3] يَسُومُونَكُمْ[4] مَا شَاؤُوا; وَهَلْ تَرَوْنَ مَوْضِعاً لِقُدْرَة عَلَى شَيء، تُرِيدُونَهُ؟!

[When a group of `Ali's companions requested that he punishes those who assaulted `Uthman. He answered: O brothers, I am not ignorant of what you say. However, how can I accomplish this when those who assaulted are in the height of their power? They are dominant over us not we over them. They are now in the position that even your slaves have risen with them and Bedouin Arabs too have joined them. They are now among you and are harming you as they like. Do you see any way to be able to do what you aim at!?]

I feel this should be added in full and not just a part of it as it contains vital historical information on what `Ali's position was (Sunni position). I request those in charge of the site to do so.

[Ijtaba]

Salaam,

Sermon 168 was given by Imam Ali (a.s) after people swore allegiance to Amir al-mu'minin Ali (a.s) and some companions of the Prophet (s.a.w.w) said to him (a.s) that he (a.s) should punish the people who assaulted ‘Uthman.

Now what I want to know is why did Imam Ali (a.s) not punish killers of 'Uthman during his period of Caliphate?

- Were those people who assaulted 'Uthman always in the height of their power during 5 years of Imam Ali (a.s) Caliphate rule?

- Why did Muawiyah fight with Imam Ali (a.s) instead of helping Imam Ali (a.s) so that Imam Ali (a.s) and Muawiyah (jointly) would gain power over killers of Usman and thus avenge Usman's blood by punishing them?

- Is it true that Imam Ali (a.s) took bayah from assassins of 'Uthman and let them join his Army? If its true then why did Imam Ali (a.s) instead of punishing them or showing some hatred towards them... accept bayah from them and let them join his forces?

[iceman]

How did Usman die, what happened? If you can shed light on this then one can clearly get to the bottom of it.

[zaid_ibn_ali]

Salaam,

Sermon 168 was given by Imam Ali (a.s) after people swore allegiance to Amir al-mu'minin Ali (a.s) and some companions of the Prophet (s.a.w.w) said to him (a.s) that he (a.s) should punish the people who assaulted ‘Uthman.

Now what I want to know is why did Imam Ali (a.s) not punish killers of 'Uthman during his period of Caliphate?

- Were those people who assaulted 'Uthman always in the height of their power during 5 years of Imam Ali (a.s) Caliphate rule?

- Why did Muawiyah fight with Imam Ali (a.s) instead of helping Imam Ali (a.s) so that Imam Ali (a.s) and Muawiyah (jointly) would gain power over killers of Usman and thus avenge Usman's blood by punishing them?

- Is it true that Imam Ali (a.s) took bayah from assassins of 'Uthman and let them join his Army? If its true then why did Imam Ali (a.s) instead of punishing them or showing some hatred towards them... accept bayah from them and let them join his forces?

The answer is POLITICS.

Not all is binary.

Look at shia Iraq. Abdul Majid Khoei killed by sadr or khomeini?
Does that mean one side is kufr rebels & other on haq?

Its human nature, politics, allegiences & differences between even those held in high regards on both sides.

It happens.

Is khomeni on haqq or those respected shia who oppose him?

Before shia take a binary view of the sahabas differences in the past, they should look at their own marja & leaders today.

[iceman]

The answer is POLITICS.

Not all is binary.

Look at shia Iraq. Abdul Majid Khoei killed by sadr or khomeini?
Does that mean one side is kufr rebels & other on haq?

Its human nature, politics, allegiences & differences between even those held in high regards on both sides.

It happens.

Is khomeni on haqq or those respected shia who oppose him?

Before shia take a binary view of the sahabas differences in the past, they should look at their own marja & leaders today.

Why do you seem to get personal on everything and give it the Anti or v Shia touch? Is it the way you've been raised and groomed. What happened with Usman, do you want to shed some light on his murder or continue with sticking to putting one up and against the Shia.

[Abu Muhammad]

Why do you seem to get personal on everything and give it the Anti or v Shia touch? Is it the way you've been raised and groomed. What happened with Usman, do you want to shed some light on his murder or continue with sticking to putting one up and against the Shia.

Haha... Good Lord! Since when that answer was personal? 😂

[muslim720]

The discussion topic is Imam Ali's (ra) reaction to Uthman's (ra) death.  Another user wants to take three steps back to discuss how Uthman (ra) died.  Changing goal posts much?

[Ijtaba]

I asked:

Now what I want to know is why did Imam Ali (a.s) not punish killers of 'Uthman during his period of Caliphate?

You answered:

The answer is POLITICS.

What Politics?

[Ijtaba]

If Imam Ali (a.s) did not punish assassins of Uthman due to politics... then did Muawiya during his rule punish the assassins of Uthman?

[iceman]

Who were the assassins of Usman? Bringing them to justice and punishing them is a later matter. Why didn't Ali do this or that can also be discussed but what was there to be done. Usman's wife got injured trying to save him. In the struggle she lost two of her fingers. 

Noe if this is true then she definitely knew who the killer or killers were. Is there anything from history were she demanded Qisas for he husband's death and wanted the killer/s to be brought to justice. Do we have anything from her.

[iceman]

Haha... Good Lord! Since when that answer was personal? 😂

Ok, point taken 😊 Muawiyah was very strong and influential and was a recognised figure and also related to Usman, did he have no duty and role in protecting Usman because the threat was imminent?

[muslim720]

Why didn't Ali do this or that can also be discussed but what was there to be done.

We are only sharing your own sources with you to prove the inconsistencies in your arguments.

Usman's wife got injured trying to save him. In the struggle she lost two of her fingers.

Yes, I have read that report.  Ironically, a woman threw her hands between her husband and down-coming sword but Imam Ali (ra), according to you, chose to be a spectator when his wife (ra) was (allegedly) attacked.

Noe if this is true then she definitely knew who the killer or killers were.

You are turning this into a crime scene without realizing that the attackers did not wait to pose for a picture.  Not to mention their identities (faces) could be concealed.

Is there anything from history were she demanded Qisas for he husband's death and wanted the killer/s to be brought to justice.

Assuming there was no demand from her, does that invalidate the concept of Qisas?

Do we have anything from her.

That still does not invalidate the right of family members to Qisas.

[Noor-us-Sunnah]

Ok, point taken 😊 Muawiyah was very strong and influential and was a recognised figure and also related to Usman, did he have no duty and role in protecting Usman because the threat was imminent?

What could he do when Uthman(ra) didnt want bloodshed in the holy city of Prophet(saws) due to him. Infact he even stopped Ali(ra) when he asled persmission from uthman(ra).

[Ijtaba]

While I was searching internet for relevant information regarding assassins of 'Uthman, I found following letter of 'Uthman's wife to Muawiya inciting him to rise against 'Uthman's assassins.

http://www.alim.org/library/biography/khalifa/content/KUT/50/2

Khalifa Uthman bin Affan - Naila's Letter to Amir Muawiyah

Naila's letter

In her letter, Naila wrote:

"From Naila bint Farafsa to Amir Muawiyah b Abi Sufyan.

By this letter I call you to God Who showered His bounties on you; made you Muslims; showed you the light, and liberated you from kufr.

In the name of God I appeal to you to rise in the cause of Uthman who has been butchered mercilessly. By way of your relationship with him, the responsibility to avenge his blood devolves on you. It is the command of Allah that if there is bloodshed between two groups of Muslims you should strive for peace among them, but, if any group transgresses, take action against the rebels and kill them.

Some people rebelled against Uthman without just cause. You know what high position Uthman commanded in Islam. He was very close and dear to the Holy Prophet. He never coveted the caliphate. He was chosen as the Caliph by the people. During the twelve years of his office he worked day and night for the welfare of the people. During his caliphate extensive conquests were made. Immense wealth flowed into the public treasury. The stipends of the people were increased. The people became more prosperous. Instead of appreciating the benefits of his rule some miscreants because of ulterior considerations conspired against him. Uthman could have suppressed such agitation with force, but he refrained from using force against his people. As a true Muslim he resigned himself to the decree of God.

He satisfactorily explained all the allegations that were levelled against him. During the twelve years of his caliphate he did' not charge any thing for his emoluments from the public treasury. He spent large amounts from his own resources for public benefit. He was the richest man in Arabia at the time of becoming the caliph; after becoming the caliph his assets steadily diminished. False and frivolous charges of nepotism were levelled against him, he was a good judge of men and matters, and he appointed only such persons who enjoyed his confidence, and who could be expected to carry forward his policies.

The revolt against Uthman was the result of some antinational conspiracy. Some extraneous forces pulled the wires. Jealous of the triumphs of Islam they conspired to subvert Islam from within. What is regrettable is that even some eminent Companions played into the hands of these conspirators, and lent them their indirect support.

The rioters besieged the house of Uthman. They stood at the door fully armed. They did not allow any food or water to enter the house. We were denied the use of water from the well which Uthman had purchased with his own money. The rebels accepted the lead of Ali, Muhammad b Abu Bakr, Talha and Zubair in all matters. Among the rioters were the tribes of Khuza'ah, Sa'ad b Bakr, Hudhail, Jahina, and the Muzina They also included contingents from

Basra and Kufa In the siege the rioters wounded Uthman with arrows. These persons killed some persons who wanted to fight against them in defense of the Caliph. The Caliph looked around him, but he could see no person in Madina from whom he could expect justice.

The rioters penetrated into the house. They burnt the gate, broke 'tine windows and looted property. Muhammad b Abu Bakr pulled the beard of the Caliph. Then one of the rioters struck Uthman on the head and he fell down unconscious. The rioters wanted to cut off his head. I and Bint Shiba threw ourselves on the body of Uthman. They pulled us away and robbed us of our ornaments.

I am sending you along with this letter the blood stained clothes of the Caliph. Please see that his blood does not go unavenged. May Allah have mercy on the soul of Uthman! May the curse of God be on his murderers!"

Is this letter authentic?

If this letter is authentic then why did 'Uthman's wife not ask the ruler (i.e. Caliph) of her time Amir ul Momineen Imam Ali (a.s) of punishing assassins of 'Uthman instead of inciting Muawiya to avenge 'Uthman's death?

And lastly, when Muawiya became ruler (i.e. King) of Muslims, did he comply with the request of 'Uthman wife and punish the assassins of 'Uthman?

[muslim720]

And lastly, when Muawiya became ruler (i.e. King) of Muslims, did he comply with the request of 'Uthman wife and punish the assassins of 'Uthman?

Leaving the letter aside, until we establish its authenticity or lack thereof, this is why you should appreciate Muawiyah's haste (in the matter of Uthman's qisas).  I do not know how much did Muawiyah follow up on this matter but there is a saying among people from the subcontinent which loosely translated goes: you hammer the iron when its hot (in reference to blacksmiths).  By the time Muawiyah became the leader, the matter had gone cold and the culprits were scattered all around, perhaps more influential than before.

Having said all that, the Ahlus Sunnah Wal Jama'ah position is that Imam Ali (ra) was upon haqq.  However, I only wanted to highlight the fact that Muawiyah's concerns (demand for qisas and being hasty in the matter) were not invalid.

[iceman]

http://www.islamhelpline.net/qa/123

From the above link you get the following reply;

"When Hadrat Aisha heard about the brutal murder of Hadrat Uthman, and in the manner in which she was told the whole gruesome episode, she took a position to bring the criminals who had murdered Hadrat Uthman to justice! There is no doubt that she was a victim of mis-information, which resulted in her mobilizing the opposition at the Battle of Jamal. Hadrat Aisha later in her recordings admitted her mistake at mobilizing the opposition, and would regret the stand she had taken against Hadrat Ali (r.a.)"

Notice the words 'VICTIM OF MISINFORMATION ' and 'ADMITTED HER MISTAKE'

Some serious mistakes we have here which cost many lives and which stained Islamic history and brought a dark era.

Point to be noted that Aisha was misinformed, but misinformed by whom? Misinformed in exactly the same way and manner that people are being misinformed  of Shiaism and the Shias. This misinformation about Ali and then his Shias has been going on for sometime.

[iceman]

The answer is POLITICS.

Not all is binary.

Look at shia Iraq. Abdul Majid Khoei killed by sadr or khomeini?
Does that mean one side is kufr rebels & other on haq?

Its human nature, politics, allegiences & differences between even those held in high regards on both sides.

It happens.

Is khomeni on haqq or those respected shia who oppose him?

Before shia take a binary view of the sahabas differences in the past, they should look at their own marja & leaders today.

Probably the answer should be according to your terms, just as Abu Bakr couldn't or wouldn't punish Khalid ibn Whalid for his crime. Because Khalid was no ordinary person but a very important and influential figure.

[iceman]

Can someone shed some light on the following;

Sunni historian reported that Once Aisha went to Uthman and asked for her share of inheritance of Prophet (after so many years passed from the death of Prophet). Uthman refrained to give Aisha any money by reminding her that she was one those who testified and encouraged Abu-Bakr to refrain to pay the share of inheritance of Fatimah (AS). So if Fatimah does not have any share of inheritance, then why should she? Aisha became extremely angry at Uthman, and came out saying:
"Kill this old fool (Na'thal), for he is unbeliever."
References:
History of Ibn Athir, v3, p206
Lisan al-Arab, v14, p141
al-Iqd al-Farid, v4, p290
Sharh al-Nahj, by Ibn Abi al-Hadid, v16, pp 220-223
Manaqib by Khawarzmi, page 117
Tadkhirath al Khawwas page 38
Asadul Ghaba Volume 3 page 14, "Dhikr Jamal"
Al Istiab Volume 2 page 185
Al Nahaya Volume 5 page 80
Qamus page 500 "lughut Nathal" by Firozabadi
Iqd al Fareed Volume 2 page 117 "Dhikr Jamal"
Shaykh Mudheera page 163

Did Aisha instigate the murder of Usman?

[Hani]

Can someone shed some light on the following;

Sunni historian reported that Once Aisha went to Uthman and asked for her share of inheritance of Prophet (after so many years passed from the death of Prophet). Uthman refrained to give Aisha any money by reminding her that she was one those who testified and encouraged Abu-Bakr to refrain to pay the share of inheritance of Fatimah (AS). So if Fatimah does not have any share of inheritance, then why should she? Aisha became extremely angry at Uthman, and came out saying:
"Kill this old fool (Na'thal), for he is unbeliever."
References:
History of Ibn Athir, v3, p206
Lisan al-Arab, v14, p141
al-Iqd al-Farid, v4, p290
Sharh al-Nahj, by Ibn Abi al-Hadid, v16, pp 220-223
Manaqib by Khawarzmi, page 117
Tadkhirath al Khawwas page 38
Asadul Ghaba Volume 3 page 14, "Dhikr Jamal"
Al Istiab Volume 2 page 185
Al Nahaya Volume 5 page 80
Qamus page 500 "lughut Nathal" by Firozabadi
Iqd al Fareed Volume 2 page 117 "Dhikr Jamal"
Shaykh Mudheera page 163

Did Aisha instigate the murder of Usman?

Okay you dumb Shia moron, I read this irrelevant garbage you copied which has nothing to do with the topic, I went to the first source listed (History of Ibn al-Athir) I couldn't find it, can you locate this for us you backwards ignorant ape?

Here's the entirety of volume three in PDF:
https://ia802707.us.archive.org/15/items/WAQkamilt/kamilt03.pdf

[iceman]

Okay you dumb Shia moron, I read this irrelevant garbage you copied which has nothing to do with the topic, I went to the first source listed (History of Ibn al-Athir) I couldn't find it, can you locate this for us you backwards ignorant ape?

Here's the entirety of volume three in PDF:
https://ia802707.us.archive.org/15/items/WAQkamilt/kamilt03.pdf

Did I touch a painful nerve? 😊 And a very painful nerve by the sound of it. You only like to mention and tell one side of the story and tale. Why not both or all sides 😊

https://www.ummah.com/forum/member/8734-al-ghurabah